Member Info for maestro1

yes mike thats what im hoping for, the great thing is the application has been submitted the ball is in icsid court.

onlooker I wouldnt worry about the financial implications, im sure the company has that covered. :-) With regards to roi having their say, yes they can but chl have not released info which can be rather embarrassing for roi YET, im crossing my fingers ICsid clear this application within 6 months. I have not seen another icsid award where inadmissible statements have been used.

The hope is that annulment is cleared asap and company can continue the fight. I'm fairly confident judging by results RNs the company has someone lined up so however long it takes we will take them on...

Gp The company through their nomad are updating stock exchange, they are also asking of their opinion could/should chl be readmitted to market. Once the company knows they will let us know.. Chl can always get extensions, they won't necessarily get the boot out of market if they don't relist before 6 months..

there you go Charlotte, Jamesss has answer it for you... :-)

If this gets annulled it will go to merit and quantum phase, CHL have held back alot of evidence which will be very relevant in that phase.

Considering Roi didnt claim poor DD by CHL, the tribunal came to their own conclusion of poor DD even without allowing chl to provide evidence of the contrary.

CHL make a fair point with regards to DD, they state award is "arbitrary" on this critical point, Klöckner case got annulled with similar ground. I think on this point of precedence chl will get award annulled. 192.The Tribunal therefore concluded that the Claimants' due diligence was beneath the standard required of a "reasonable investor in the Indonesian mining sector" without evidence of what that standard entailed. The Minnotte factors were judged in a vacuum. Accordingly, the Award is arbitrary on this critical point (this is without considering the fact that the Tribunal denied the Claimants the opportunity to present evidence on this standard and the full extent of their actual due diligence program). Arbitrariness of this kind was recognised as a basis for annulment in Klöckner I. 263 Below is the Klockner paragraph Klöckner I, para. 52(e) ("It is possible to have different opinions in these delicate questions, or even, as do the Applicant for Annulment or the Dissenting Opinion, to consider the Tribunal's answers to them not very convincing, or inadequate. But since the answers seem tenable and not arbitrary, they do not constitute the manifest excess of powers which alone would justify annulment under Article 52(1)(b)")

so glad they put transcripts of the hearing in the appeal application, the world can see how two faced the arbiters were..

using inadmissible statements is an annulable ground, the fact they didnt even ask CHL about this is unbelievable. CHL vented their disapproval of bringing in the minotte case so late on as it drastically changed the scope of the forgery case, no mention of the disapproval in the award.

one can speculate that their(arbiters) hands were twisted by the hierarchy at world bank. I want links between Kim Yong and Sri Indrawati investigated, she lobbied hard for his re-election as world bank leader and mysteriously left months before the verdict, she knew this verdict would cost them over $50b including other mining companies.

onlooker Hi, the tribunal have been inconsistent and made rules as they went along, they "manifestly exceeded their powers", the Minotte submission will very likely annul this award imho. The part that i liked was DQ view "In the Annulment Application we note that, the day after the issuance of the Award, Mr Noor hosted a press conference in which he accepted congratulations for the Tribunal's decision. I struggle to see how the same witness who refused to attend the hearing to face cross-examination can take credit for the result, unless of course the decision not to come to the hearing was calculated to achieve that result. In my personal opinion, the behaviour of Isran Noor in this case has been very poor and reflects badly on Indonesia as an investment destination. "

But they do mention who "most likely" assisted ridlatama, Djaja Putra. I dont know whats the tribunal have been playing at, the award is written by an amateurs, it makes you think the hierarchy at world bank said we need this case to go, make justifications, and they came with these lame excuses. They are setting a dangerous precedence...

Orbiter If this award gets annulled, the forgery aspect is finished, roi will not challenge it again IMHO, they admitted that the fraud couldn't have happened without insider and they also named who he was. They lied, the forgery aspect won't go further..

Orbiter This is not an appeal, its an annulment app which can only address the errors the tribunal made in the award, no new evidence can be put. Chl have mentioned no company in the past had to do forensic test on signatures don't know why they expect chl. The tribunal are setting dangerous precedence when the state police and other authorities cannot find forgery who are familiar with local law but the tribunal seem they can..

Well the glove are off indeed, I bet the 3 arbiters will be really embarrassed. This appeal is put down in history, law student and professionals will analyse the award and conclude just how bias the tribunal was. Interesting what DQ said, Indonesia will challenge stay of cost immediately, considering all these annullable grounds it will be hard not to keep stay of cost in place. Tribunal don't want to sound corrupt...

Cossy Exactly we are not law professionals but we know common sense, for some reason the tribunal seemed to be bias against CHL imho.

Fregatr It was rather unfair with all the slack DQ got by some investors, the tribunal were playing us if you read the annulment with regards to the validity of exploitation licenses. DQ is genuine guy he has shareholders interest at heart. I'm confident he will get us just compensation.

Orbiter All that doesn't matter to us, what we need is for us to get the award annulled. You have to remember we only need one ground for successful annulment, if one triggers the annulment the tribunal will stop analysing the award and annul the award. I think the tribunal tried to play us. Notice at the end chl said we reserve the right to bring in new evidence in the annulment application. Within a year the annulment phase should be settled.

Cossy These are world class law professionals, they totally screwed it up.